 |
| Ray |
It is important that you understand what these people are capable of. I have already described (and documented) some of their outrageous antics (see). But there’s much more.
 |
| Ken |
To learn more about the Old Guard’s efforts to secure Tom Fuentes’ appointment as Frogue’s replacement (in 2000), see Fuentes’ suspicious appointment, an account from Dissent.
*As I recall, Merrifield was not associated with the union Old Guard (c. 1996-2000). The rest of these characters, however, were.
9 comments:
The new contract is about addressing longstanding inequities - and the scandalous problem with the labs. Everybody knows the problems. We need to be real and grown-up about this stuff - finally.
12:13 You are full of it.
Do these greedy employed not watch the news and see that we are in a recesssion? How about if these unhappy Faculty take an opportunity to appreciate what they have, it will be a long list... Here is one for the list, free health care.
6:14, on what basis have you concluded that the SOCCCD faculty are greedy? Go back to Fox.
Strange....these horribly vicious, bigoted, depraved, physically repulsive and disfigured perverts somehow got us some of the best faculty contracts and raises in the state, with benefits we all enjoy today.
How can this be???
BVD and his Dissent have instructed us in the true way, teaching us that there are good people, and there are bad people. The good people, who are always good, can do no bad, and the bad people, who are always bad, can do no good. Any of life's questions, no matter how puzzling and complex, can be completely understood by simply applying Guru BVD's advanced methods of associating the question with either the good people or the bad people, by avoiding the temptation to be distracted by the idea or deed itself, and--this is the key-- focusing, students, only on the persons behind it.
Example: John Smith gives all his money to the poor and needy. Now the unsophisticated lay person might jump to the conclusion that this was a good deed. But not so fast! The proper research must first be conducted on Mr. John Smith, and that research, so brilliantly exemplified day after day in these pages, might show that John Smith's wife once had a neighbor whose second cousin lived on the same street as Steve Frogue! Yes, the evil STEVE FROGUE! It therefore follows that John Smith's original deed must in fact be an evil one, joined at the hip as it is with the evil Steve Frogue. Further, John Smith must now be placed forever in the category of evil persons who may APPEAR to do good, but in reality CANNOT do good, ever.
That's philosophy, you know. (If the reader has difficulty following this example, consult your philosopher).
So either those contracts and raises we all enjoyed were really no good at all, or those people who fought for them were actually good and not bad. It's got to be one or the other, so which is it? Let's see....who's behind this question, anyway?
It's great when one's critics are self-refuting. By all means, defend yourselves!
The example is easily followed, 9:55, but it appears to be a false hypothetical.
Oh, DEAR, 9:55. Do you ever actually *read* this blog? Apparently not carefully. It *is* a college blog, you know. I suggest returning to your cave.
I think 9:55 laid it out very well.
Post a Comment